1 |
On 7/5/06, Daniel Iliev <danny@××××××××.com> wrote: |
2 |
> Then what is the purpose of: |
3 |
> "emerge --update world" w/o "--deep"? |
4 |
|
5 |
To update only the packages in world, without updating dependancies. |
6 |
As I think I mentioned, some people do not like using --deep, because |
7 |
they don't necessarily want to update all libraries to the latest |
8 |
available version for fear of introducing instability/bugs into their |
9 |
systems. So they *may* want to update to the latest firefox, but that |
10 |
doesn't mean they want the latest gtk+ libraries as well. Presumably |
11 |
they also monitor the GLSA channels to make sure they don't miss |
12 |
important security updates... |
13 |
|
14 |
> Well, this means that one has to manually handle things as well as in |
15 |
> the way I deal with packages, right? ;-) |
16 |
|
17 |
Well, yes, but only for the few things that you really care about, not |
18 |
the entire system. And why --depclean should always be run with |
19 |
--pretend first. |
20 |
|
21 |
> Compared to it, the router checks for updates about 2 times faster. |
22 |
> I can't be precise, but if you insist I could do a "time emerge -pvuDN |
23 |
> world" on both of them and send the results. |
24 |
|
25 |
Ok, but that is for two completely different systems with different |
26 |
sets of packages installed. It doesn't tell us whether the time is a |
27 |
function of the total number of packages that are installed, or the |
28 |
number of things listed in world. The question is, if your athlon |
29 |
didn't have any dependancies in world, would the update check run |
30 |
faster or slower? I don't _actually_ care about the answer, I'm just |
31 |
pointing out that comparing the performance of systems with different |
32 |
sets of packages installed isn't a good way to test how the |
33 |
performance of portage relates to the size of the world file. |
34 |
|
35 |
-Richard |
36 |
-- |
37 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |